A top congressional Republican is saying a new report that concludes Al Qaeda did not carry out the 2012 attack on the U.S diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, is misleading.

The new report published Saturday in the New York Times concludes that there was no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault that took place on September 11, 2012, and that it appeared that the attack was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made anti-Islamic video, as the Obama administration first claimed.

New York Rep. Peter King, member and former chairman of the Houses Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, told Fox News the argument that the most overtly anti-Western militia, Ansar al-Shariah  not Al Qaeda  led the attack in an academic argument over semantics, considering Ansar al-Shariah is widely believed to be an affiliate terror group of Al Qaeda.

youtube displays how many views a video receives. I clearly recall a timely report that this video had only a few views before the Rice claim, certainly not enough to cause an army to rise up across northern Africa and attack embassies and outposts.

This really reeks of desperation on their part about Benghazi. I’d say it’s about Hillary. Whoever mentioned that above is probably right.

Hillary probably has polling that shows Benghazi will injure her badly. It should. In all honesty, she was a weak, incompetent Sec of State. So much bad happened under her watch, that if she’d been a US commander, she’d have been relieved of command.

29
posted on 12/28/2013 4:19:03 PM PST
by xzins
( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)

From the article at the link: It would also contradict a separate report by a leading social media firm that found that the first reference to the anti-Islam film that was initially blamed for sparking the attack was not detected on social media until a day later.

31
posted on 12/28/2013 4:22:36 PM PST
by xzins
( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)

“Rep. Donna Edwards (D-Md.) and seven other Democrats have proposed legislation that would eliminate the possibility of imposing the death penalty for a range of federal offenses, including several categories of murder and crimes against the government like treason and espionage.”

Hope has returned to the hearts of scores of millions of men and women, and with that hope there burns the flame of anger against the brutal, corrupt invader. And still more fiercely burn the fires of hatred and contempt for the filthy Quislings whom he has suborned.

Hillary is weak and gets trampled by all who deal with her. From her husband, to her party, to Obama, to heads of state, she’s a classic facilitator of an abuse cycle with herself on the receiving end of abuse.

44
posted on 12/28/2013 5:04:06 PM PST
by xzins
( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)

Doesn't little Pinch know there is an Internet? Doesn't the NYT editorial czars know that there is congressional testimony? Don't they know that the black flag of al-Queda flies over Benghazi? Don't they know that there were attacks before this one? Don't they know that there is radio/electronic traffic recorded from that night? Don't they know...never mind...

Don't they care about four dead Americans?

I'm getting a headache.

If I'm an 0bama supporter I would have to ask myself, which pill should I take, the red or blue one this time?

This is a big deal and deserves more fight from us than just echo chamber grumbling on this thread.

This is our entire problem in this country.

The NYT piece is well written and illustrated with bold photography, video, and maps. There are chapters where the article appears to deal with various "rumors" to do with Benghazi.

THIS IS THE PIECE THAT CEMENTS THE "TRUTH" ABOUT BENGHAZI INTO AMERICAN HISTORY. If we don't fight it right now, it will be the truth.

Phrases like "the Times researched for many months" or "the truth was more complicated than that" solve curiosity in most Americans' minds.

The only way to fight anything in this article is to step up factual refutations with footnotes (which this article does not have) and point by point disprove these allegations. And not on Rush Limbaugh's show or Sean Hannity's. The fight has to be LOUD AND BIG and dwarf the fight over Phil Robertson's freedom of speech.

The rest of this thread should hopefully focus on nuts and bolts directions on how to fight this, or else we deserve President Hillary Clinton.

Let’s assume, yaelle, that the rewrite of history is to benefit Hillary. What does she need to accomplish more than being able to say, “An in-depth investigative article by the NYTimes says we were right, that Benghazi was inflamed by a video and that al-Qaeda was not personally involved.”

She can say that now.

How should conservatives deal with that?

50
posted on 12/28/2013 5:25:22 PM PST
by xzins
( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.